Slashdot Mirror
Federal Reserve To Use Internet For Money Transfer
An anonymous reader writes "According to the New York Post, the Federal Reserve (i.e. Alan Greenspan and Co.) is going to change the way that it transfers money between banks so that transfers now take place over the internet instead of via a private banking network. They aren't specifying the types of security measures that will be used (security through obscurity?) Am I the only one who thinks that this is a very bad idea? Might a DDOS attack on the Fed's computers bring down the entire banking system?" The banks have put some thought into security.
First transaction
Shocking. To think they'd use the INTERNET instead of analog phone lines!
No need to have a really secure VPN. Just use ROT-13 and use the DMCA to crack down hard on anyone who cracks it.
what makes you think "using the internet" equates to "having a server completely open to the public with no backup processes"? in the UK you can do your taxes online, I guess if they get DDOS'd no one will have to pay? .....Hey thanks for the tip!
"You've got money!"
"He who throws mud, loses ground." - proverb
Wonder how long it will be until they see:
Transaction complete.
Confirmation: All your bank accounts belong to us!
nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
The biggest concern isn't the 13-year-old who hacks into the Fedwire and sends himself some money -- it's terrorism.
Gee, a terrorist is a bigger threat than a script kiddie, who'd have thought?
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
(Formerly known as PayPal)
... uh, never mind. There's a couple of suits at the door waving badges ...*
*It's a joke. No, really, it's a joke. Hey, motherfucka, I SAID it's just a freaking JOKE! Ouch. Take these damn cuffs off me you "mffff"...
Do not try to transfer the money online. That's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth. There is no money online. Then you'll see that it is not the money you transfer online, it is only yourself.
Let's not forget that one can hate his government, but love his country.
Yup, that's why I only barter. I need a new car, and Phil is willing to sell his for 278 bushels of corn. Unfortunatlely, I'm not a farmer, but my brother-in-law Jed is. He wants a big screen TV and a jacuzzi. Unfortunately, I have neither. But my neighbo does. But I don't have anything he wants either.
So I just beat up Phil and take the damn car.
Stupid barter system.
Close, but no cigar. What gives money its value is our collective agreement to accept it in payment. When you come down to it, we're really bartering, but instead of having to have goods to swap, we swap something easy to carry and of a known (if artificial) value. Money is just an abstract representation of goods that simplifies commerce.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Of course you're not the only one that thinks that is a very bad idea. There are hordes of technical people who think in terms of bad slogans.
The problem with "security through obscurity" is that when that is your primary, or only, protection, it is usually very poor security.
On the other hand, if you start with very good security and don't publish any details of additional steps, and you guard your network as if everyone does know the details anyway, then obscurity enhances your security.
In other words, obscurity does not provide much security, but it can enhance your security.
An interesting hack would be to distribute the entire government budget to every back account in America, inversely by the balance.
The guy with a $100 balance would score several thousand.
The guy with $99,999 would score $0.01.
Legal Note: I don't advocate doing this, or any illegal funds transactions at all, and it definately won't be me doing it, I don't like prison that much.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.